Late Breaking Abstract - Compare outcomes between COPD patients treated with tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) and umeclidium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI)

Background: There is limited real-world evidence comparing fixed-dose LAMA/LABA treatments. Aim: Compare COPD-related healthcare resource utilization (C-HRU) and costs (C-HC) between patients initiating TIO/OLO vs. UMEC/VI. Methods: This was a retrospective study using Optum Research Database claims data between 01/01/2013-31/10/2018. Patients on TIO/OLO and UMEC/VI were propensity score matched 1:2. Annualized population COPD-related (defined as medical/pharmacy claims involving COPD diagnosis or maintenance/rescue/OCS/respiratory antibiotics) HRU and cost were calculated by cohort as [SUM (events/cost)÷SUM(follow-up days)]*365. Results & Conclusion: 4,115 TIO/OLO and 8,230 UMEC/VI initiators were included (Figure 1) with 50% male, mean age of 72 years and 94% Medicare-insured. TIO/OLO was associated with lower emergency room (14% visits & 17% costs) and pharmacy (3% fills & 6% costs) use (Tables 1 & 2) vs. UMEC/VI. In a real-world setting, TIO/OLO patients had significantly better outcomes in some important health care measures and statistically similar outcomes in other measures compared to UMEC/VI patients.